MERP is a total conversion modification of the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. Explore Middle-earth in a fully open-ended environment like you've never seen before. Play races like Elves, Men, Hobbits and Dwarves and take part in the War of the Ring.

Its been a while since the last news post, so we thought we'd make a new one for the new year just to give everyone an idea of where we are at currently. Don't worry, we haven't gone anywhere.
We all had a lovely Christmas over at MERP HQ, its been quite quiet, but then again, we've had no work to do. Hope you lot a had a great Christmas and New Year too!

So, the bit every one wants to know about, how is the C&D situation going?
Well, we were in contact with WB's attorney before Christmas, but haven't spoken to them for about a month due to the holidays. We hope to get back into negotiations soon, but because of their other lawsuit with Tolkien Enterprises, we've been swept under the rug a little. It looks more hopeful than a few months ago, I'll put it like that. The negotiations are currently under an NDA, which is why we don't post much anymore, but the team are still actively fighting for MERP.
The petition also just surpassed 26 000 signatures, which is just mind-blowing, we never thought we'd even get a fraction of that, so Thank-you so much for getting so many people on board and for your continued support on here and on out Facebook page.
We hope to be able to tell you more about the situation as soon as possible.

In other news:

MERP scored in the top 50 mods of 2012

Happy Birthday Tolkien! (January 3rd)

That's all for now, but we hope to post more soon!

-Happy new year from the MERP team
^MEB

PS: RecoveryAnonymous, you are an absolute legend, all the medals to you :D

I don't understand why you give a **** about C&D, just continue your work and if ModDB staff is too scared to "host" your mod here, just make a website yourself. I mean come on what the **** can "Gay Bros" do to you...

Quite a bit actually considering they know who they are. I agree they should continue the work anyway and just not say they are, maybe they are and we just don't know it. Fact is they are free to make what they want if they keep it to themselves, absolutely nothing WB can do about that.

I have just fist pumped so hard! It does sound like though they might let you continue building your mod if you mention it is for non-commercial reasons. And I think you should make it a private project and post pictures of your work because you want to see if the fans think it looks canon enough.

To WB: You... shall not... PASS!
To MERP: The world is indeed full of peril and in it there are many dark places. But still there is much that is fair. And though in all lands, love is now mingled with grief, it still grows, perhaps, the greater.
There might come a day, when corporate greed triumphs over good intent, but it is NOT THIS DAY! You have all our swords, bows, and axes!

Yay, I'm in high spirits as I've just seen The Hobbit (me and my friends had decided to go together long ago and today was our first opportunity), which was very awesome (PJ did it again). Then I come home and see a MERP update. O man, today is a f*cking brilliant day :D

work on it in secret > publish from a chinese website (get a chinese friend/family member>etc) to upload it in a random internet Cafe :) good luck WB Sue anyone that way. best bit is china does not give a **** about what laws WB says is on their side lollers

Yep, I didn't pay WB ANY money since they did this to you guys. I actually watched a dvdrip of The Hobbit and then I took it and... well... I am not going to incriminate myself further that I already have so I will say no more;) Let's just say that I did my part to revolt against the corporate monster known as Warner Brothers. I was doing some research here and I honestly believe you can release the mod and WB can't actually do ****. Modding is an art form and a form of expression. Damn WB to hell for treading where they shouldn't. Tolkien would be turning in his grave if he heard of what WB did to us hardcore Middle Earth fans! BOO WARNER BROTHERS!!! LIKE A DAMN GREEDY KID IN THE SANDBOX SAYING "THIS IS MY TOY! YOU CAN'T PLAY WITH MY TOY!!!"

whats wrong with them?
they're preventing change in america that could really benefit that country and why?
so they can keep their big guns that make them feel like tough men

they cling to the 2nd amendment which was adopted over 200 years ago, times have change from when america was young and fragile and laws have to be updated or thrown out if they dont relate to the present
you have police to protect your homes and a powerful military to protect your country. being oppressed by a dictatorial government doesnt look too likely either so why do you need mil-grade weapons?

You are a true idiot. You would deny people the right to defend their lives against criminals. Do you realize that the police do NOT have a duty to protect you? Of course, you live in the UK, aka 1984-land, a place where if you express the "wrong" ideas on facebook you're thrown in jail. We Americans understand that if we allow the government to suspend our second amendment rights, soon other rights will also be taken away.

ok, just live with your cowboy mentality, if you want to maintain your 'right' to shoot each other then go ahead.
us gun crime statistics are in the top 5 worst in the world(population accounted for)and 1984-land is way way down the list with a tiny fraction of yours(i say 'yours' but your profile says portual so :/ )

lol thrown in jail, you obviously dont know the state of our jails. we havent got room for people convicted of GBH never mind desktop revolutionarys.
and most ideas are tolerated unless they incite hate or violence which i completely agree with

if your police arnt protecting the public then do they really just spend all day at donut shops?

Lawful citizens wish to maintain their right to defend themselves and their families against people that want to hurt them. That is logical and commendable. Your perspective says that lawful citizens cannot be trusted and that the government should have a monopoly on lethal force. You detest freedom.

You think, "If some gang of thugs beat the **** out of me and burn down my home, the police will save me!"

Yes, we saw how brave your police were during the London riots. And what did the ordinary civilian have to defend themselves and their property against marauding "youths"? Baseball bats! That'll scare 'em. ;-)

You just repeat the platitudes you hear on the BBC (the mouthpiece of the elites who hate you). You don't have a thought of your own.

why do you need assault weapons to defend youself?
that is what your government seeks to ban

no i dont expect the police to be on hand to protect me like private security but they investigate and arrest the person responcible(if possible)
i have been on the ****** end of several crimes(break ins, assaults, ect) but is the answer to shoot them?

no

there is a thing called escalation, if homeowners carry guns the intruders will carry guns
if the police carry automatic weapons, the criminals will carry automatic weapons.

by keeping our country unarmed we lower the pressure on criminals to carry firearms and yes if a guy stands up to you with a baseball bat and you arnt carrying a firearm then you will think twice about assualting his home.

its amusing that you refered to the uk as 1984-land when your mentality and that of the majority of america is still stuck back in the 18/19th century with the wild west

lol your ragging on our police? i wonder how many people would have been shot by yours if they had faced those numbers with so few police.
to put it in perspective; one old man was pushed by an officer because he was in the way of a riot police line.
he happend to die from a weak heart due to the trauma.
the officer was then crusified by the media for just doing his job. lost his job and faced time in prison.

in your country cops can shoot a guy and be back on the job in weeks.so yer,our police are more careful to use force on civilians because they dont want to be forced in to measures that would cost them their jobs

right, its late and im tired(of this and just in general)
i have just got back from the pub so forgive me for any typos ive missed

its obvious we'll never agree so have fun in your world of guns and 'freedom'

Sorry. If someone wants to beat the **** out of you, the answer IS to shoot them. You can be seriously maimed or crippled by some violent thug that attacks you. I live in an awful ghetto in St. Louis and I have no faith in the police to protect me from psychopaths. Look up "knockout king" on google if you want to know the type of people around here.

Besides that, an "assault weapon" ban is just the first phase of gun control. The marxists want to ban all civilian ownership of guns. Anyway, you're right that I won't persuade you and you won't change my views, so it's best to leave it at that.

This is quite possibly one of the worst things to happen to a MERP update.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
That is the second amendment. It was adopted from the English Bill of Rights, because in England, the right to bear arms was considered a natural right. Funny how you mocked Davo--I would recommend that you take a basic history course.

A few points:
1- The writers of the US Constitutions and "founders" were all heavily influenced by John Stuart Mill and NOT by Ayn Rand, lol.
2- "a well regulated militia" refers to what we now consider the National Guard, State armed forces, the Police--basically, all well regulated militias lol.
3- No one is really making an argument to ban all weapon sales or to "take" guns away. The argument for policy to reduce gun violence stems from the fact, yes this is an empirical fact, that a greater exposure to guns (more guns in more hands) leads to more cases of gun violence.
There has recently been an argument that the states/cities with the greatest gun control laws have the greatest amounts of gun violence--but that is just a simple logical fallacy, lol (post hoc). The states and cities are adapting stronger gun control in an effort to reduce gun violence. It is because of the violence that the laws have been passed, lol.
Another argument that has floated around is that the removal of guns won't stop "bad guys" from doing "bad things." That's another simple fallacy, more of a red herring and nonsequitur than anything. That's like saying that men who commit rape will commit rape regardless, so why should we have anti-rape laws?
An even more absurd argument has been the "we need guns to protect us from our GOVERNMENT who is going to round us up and put us into FEMA CAMPS!" I can't even begin to tackle this because it is a demonstration of how asinine and stupid, how weak of a mind, how completely enveloped in epistemic closure the individual is, that the best thing to do is merely to point and laugh.

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Yes, who are these "people" whose protected right to bear arms will not be infringed upon? Are the "people" those people that the federal government decides are allowed to bear arms? Or are they all citizens whose rights are clearly defined in the constitution? Do you think anyone disputed civilian ownership of guns when the constitution was ratified?

"An even more absurd argument has been the "we need guns to protect us from our GOVERNMENT who is going to round us up and put us into FEMA CAMPS!" "

What sort of idiotic strawman is that? Anyone that believes that guns are an effective check on government tyranny is a nutcase worthy of contempt? Sounds like you need to study political science (not to mention history) a little more. Expecting people to have blind faith in the benevolence and incorruptibility of the government is incredibly naive and stupid. You want to curtail people's ability to resist government tyranny.

1- there is already standing legislation that limits the sale of certain weapons.
2- we also aren't allowed to own nuclear weapons (what better way to deter a tyrannical government than a nuclear weapons in every law-abiding citizens home should they wish?)
3- the government has a monopoly on violence (the bedrock on any free and stable society) where a social contract, like the constitution, provides a framework for a representative democracy. (basically, tyranny is a non-issue in a rep. democracy where the majority of the citizens still uphold their civic duties).
4- that wasn't the intent of the second amendment (re: slave patrols)
Need I continue?